About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
this as the four horsemen of the apocalypse coming is liquidation. >> does your reporting suggest that harry reid has in fact explicitly rejected as a senate leader, a request by the republicans to add more flexibility to the cuts? >> well, we don't know that in particular, but what we do know is that the white house, they had an official down in front of the senate he recently and they were asked about giving this, being given this flexibility provision and they ultimately came back and said, we would reject any efforts to actually lessen the pain of this sequester. and so, the president here is getting himself into a situation where he's warning about all of these doom and gloom. the republicans are giving him a way out of this and they're increasingly looking to be rejecting that just so that they can continue to bring down the hammer. >> and the president, dan, is insisting not just on other spending cuts, alternatives, or even weakening the cuts, he's saying, look, i want a tax increase, too. >> what is that all about? i mean, we just had a huge tax increase, that is already, according to th
this as the apocalypse is ridiculous. >> that harry reid that he has rejected a request by the republicans to add more flexibility to the cuts? >> we don't know that in particular. but we do know the white house, they were asked about giving this being flexibility politician and they openly said, we would reject any effort to actually lessen the pain of this sequester. the president is getting himself in into a situation where she warning about all this doom and gloom. republicans are giving him a way out of this and increasingly looking to be rejecting that so they can bring down the hammer. >> paul: and the president is insisting on even weakening the cuts, he is saying, look, i want a tax increase, too. we just had a huge tax increase that is already hurting consumer spending. why does he want another one? >> because it's part of the strategy that he has been running all along which is to make it virtually impossible for the republicans to do business or sign up for it. he wants this them to be a rejection mode so he can blame them for pushing the government into the sequester. add one more thing,
such a liability for the democrats that harry reid and other democrats throw him overboard, then chris cities -- chris cities gets to name replacement. the other part of this is as you point out that if the fbi can go up the food chain because the part that they are looking at is influence pedaling, allegations of corruption that perhaps senator menendez his official office to work with his donor to pass out some business favors, perhaps, to this dozier. these are the allegations, this is what is out there. if they cannot just get to menendez but perhaps to a broader net of even bigger fish like the clintons who have been known to work with this donor, then i think the democrats have a wider scandal on their hands. >> bill: i think there is scandal here. >> guilt by association. >> bill: at this point, correct, there is no hard evans to show anything. as dr. crowley pointed out. >> that's what i have to call her. >> bill: you don't get a warrant or don't have fbi resources on a fishing expedition. >> innocent until proven guilty. wouldn't talk to the fbi and men then des who won by 19 points.
are the prospective candidates. there was a reason why todd akin won the primary. he won because harry reid went in and spent $2 million attacking him as a conservative during the republican primary. he said himself he has never voted for a tax increase. always been prolife. even supported a balanced budget amendment too conservative for missouri. the object was help nominate the weakest republican candidate possible to have is a chance. >> you are going to set your isself up as a bureau vetting the candidates. i mean -- >> no, no, no. >> the whole theory of republicanism is to let the local state or district decide. >> i think rand paul had it right. everybody has a chance. we believe in markets. let people do go in and partis it pate. the more people who participate the better off we are. the more we examine the quality of the candidates from top to bottom the more likely we end up with fewer kristine o'donnells and more rand pauls. >> chris: what do you make of the republican party decision to block temporarily but to block the nomination of a defense secretary for the first time in our histo
. how d special report? how are you doing. >> reporter: good morning, bill. bill: harry reid is talking about this potentially on the floor of the senate. if there is news we'll bring it to our viewers. graham says the debate is not over, it has not been serious. what gives? >> reporter: a couple of things, one is confirmation hearings matter. this was not a good showing for chuck hagel in this confirmation hearing and despite the fact that you have other controversial cabinet nominees who have potentially bumpy confirmation hearings hagel's did not go well, and even folks on the democratic side will acknowledge that, and that has made it even more difficult. then you have the additional problem, from his supporters' point of view, that there are calls for speeches that did not come out for the committee that hagel gave and they never received, and now you have one speech, for example, that a group says that they can get to the committee by friday. its already out of committee, but -- so now it's on the house floor. this vote happens, they need 60 votes. democrats have a 55-45 vote marg
comes up at the end of the month? >> listen if harry reid wanted to bring it up he could cancel a vacation and come in next week if he wanted. the real easy answer is immediately provide the information. there is a history with the administration and the majority party not providing all of the information. they will provide a little bit here, a little bit there. hopefully you will forget about it. bottom line if they want to get this done, they should sit down with the concerned senators and actually provide the appropriate information. that is pretty simple. bill: this is what we heard. at least two of the speeches apparently were made, four, maybe five years ago that were not provided. was it intentional for him not to present these speeches because they thought it would be controversial? >> i'm not sure, certainly. but they are, people are aware of them and they need to be part of the entire package that is being presented. and the senators have an absolute right to get this information. bill: senator lindsey graham has been hot on this trail and his big issue is not having t
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)